Quote:
Originally Posted by mikhail  Say a man gets out his car at the top of a hill he forgets about the handbrake it rolls down and hits someones fence What should his punishment be? |
Where I live, it doesn't matter
why the car rolls down off the top of a hill, if the car rolls and does property damage, the owner of the car is liable for the damages in civil court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikhail but what if the car hit and killed a child does this mean he should recieve a harsher punishment? |
Um, yeah, seeing as how children aren't property.
Ultimately, he'll be liable for wrongful death in civil court, and whether or not he'd face criminal charges depends on whether or not the state can demonstrate negligence to a jury.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikhail It seems the mens rea and actus reus (from the actual act) are the same in both but it also seems likely people would call out for a much harder punishments this seems to happen in many different examples for example a drug dealer caught selling and an indenticle drug dealer who sells something someone ODs on. |
It is commonly accepted that an action which results in relatively minor consequences would receive a
stiffer punishment if the consequences were
not minor.
So what?